Madhya Pradesh Court March 1999 Judgments
Surajmal Vs. Rukminibai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: AIR2000MP48; I(2000)DMC582; 2000(1)MPLJ19
J.G. Chitre, J. 1. Shri Ajay Ukas, counsel for the appellant. The respondent is absent. None is present for her. 2. By this appeal the appellant is assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the order which has been passed by the 3rd Addl. District Judge. Mandsaur in the matter of H.M.A. 20/98 so far as the order of the trial Court granting permanent alimony to respondent at the rate of Rs. 800/- per month is concerned. 3. A matrimonial petition was filed by the present appellant Surajmal in the said court for getting divorce against the respondent Rukminibai, his wedded wife. He alleged that Rukminibai is living in adultery for 3 years prior to the presentation of matrimonial petition in the Court. He also alleged that she used to abuse him and his family members when she was residing in his house. He further alleged that in spite of notice sent to respondent and a meeting of caste panchayat, respondent did not come back to matrimonial home. The respondent contended that the app...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Tiwari and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-30-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3417
S.P. Khare, J.1. Appellants-Gopal Tiwari and Ramesh Tiwari have been convicted under Section 307, I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each.2. The appellants and complainant-Mukesh Sharma submitted an application under Section 320(5), Cr. P.C. for permission to compound the offence. This application is supported by the affidavit of the complainant. It is mentioned therein that appellant No. 2 Ramesh Tiwari is a retired Railway driver and his son appellant No. 1 -Gopal Tiwari was booking clerk at Sagar Railway Station. Complainant-Mukesh Sharma was Ticket Collector at the same Railway Station at the time of the incident. It is also stated that now their relations are very cordial and all differences have been resolved. They are living in peace and harmony. By order-sheet dated 10-8-1998 of this Court this application was taken on record and it was observed that this application will be considered at the time of final hearing of th...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of India Vs. Nandram (Deceased) Through L.Rs. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-1999
Reported in: 1999(1)MPLJ719
ORDERN.K. Jain, J.1. This appeal under Order 43, Rule l(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order dated 4-9-1997 passed by 1st Additional District Judge, Ratlam, in M.J.C. No. 55/96 dismissing plaintiff/appellant's application under Order 9, Rule 9, Civil Procedure Code.2. Plaintiff- the State Bank of India had filed a suit for recovery of debt of Rs. 1,70,820/- against respondents/defendants in the Court below. The defendants remained absent and were, therefore, proceeded against, ex parte. A few adjournments were sought by the plaintiff for evidence and ultimately the case was fixed for plaintiffs evidence on 3-8-1996. On that date when the case was called on for hearing, Shri Kailash Sharma, counsel for the plaintiff appeared and at the very threshold made an application seeking adjournment on the ground that the witness sought to be examined by the plaintiff has fallen ill, and he was, therefore, unable to give evidence. The learned trial Judge, however, rejec...
Tag this Judgment!Kusum Gupta Vs. Agrawal Coalcorporation
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ837
S.C. Pandey, J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated 14.12.1996, passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation-cum-Labour Court (henceforth 'the Commissioner'), Ambikapur. It appears that an application under Section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (henceforth 'the Act') was filed on 26.4.95. Therefore, on 26.4.1995 and 10.7.1995, the case was adjourned on the ground that the Commissioner was at his headquarters at Bilaspur. Thereafter, no order-sheet has been recorded for the next date of 23.8.95. Thereupon, the appellant filed an application for restarting the proceedings. The case was fixed on 14.12.1996. The learned Commissioner has held that he was present at Ambikapur from 11.8.1995 onwards but, since the appellant did not take any step to get the case fixed, he dismissed the claim of the appellant.2. In the opinion of this court, the order dated 14.12.1996, passed by the then Commissioner, who was presiding over the court on 14.12.96, is totally arbitrary and...
Tag this Judgment!Kalyan Singh and anr. Vs. Sadarani and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ1758
S.C. Pandey, J.1. The appellants have filed this appeal against the award dated 6.9.1996, passed by IV Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sagar, in M.V. Case No. 81 of 1991, awarding a claim of Rs. 74,000 and interest thereon at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing of claim application, in favour of the respondent-claimant Nos. 1, 2 and 3.2. In this appeal none appeared on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. It is not necessary for them to be represented for the purpose of final disposal of this appeal as they are not affected by allowing this appeal, filed by the owner and driver of the vehicle involved, requiring this court to modify the impugned award saying that the respondent No. 4, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. too shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of the impugned award.3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned counsel for the respondent No. 4. The argument raised by the learned counsel for the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Shrawan Kumar S/O Ramesh Chandra Prasad Singh and ors. Vs. South Easte ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ636
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. The petitioners are all citizens of India. They are duly qualified and possess diploma in Mining and Mining Surveying from the Board of Technical Education, Maharashtra. The petitioners have passed Gas Testing Certificate Examination from the Director General of Mines Safety, Dhanbad and completed apprentice-ship training as Post Diploma Practical Training for a period of one year. The petitioners also possess Overman's Competency granted by Director General of Mines Safety, Dhanbad. They are desirous of employment to the post of Mining Sardar/Overman in the collieries under the respondent-South Eastern Coalfields Limited ('SECL' for short) having its head office at Bilaspur.2. The petitioner's case is that they are entitled to be considered for appointments in the service of the SECL on the basis of their seniority as trained apprentices, having completed the course of apprenticeship in accordance with the provisions of The Apprentices Act, 1961.3. The pe...
Tag this Judgment!Nagar Panchayat Vs. Sunil Kumar Rawat and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1999
Reported in: (2000)ILLJ821MP
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This is a reference made by the learned single Judge of this Court with regard to the interpretation of Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The learned single Judge by his order dated March 26, 1998 passed in W.P. No. 2683/1997, has observed that an observation in the case of State of M.P. v. Jaswant Singh, 1988 (1) MPWN 57 it needs to be reconsidered in the light of the recent decision of the Hon. Supreme Court given in the case of Dena Bank v. Kirti Kumar T. Patel, (1998-I-LLJ-1) (SC).2. The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this reference are that the Labour Court, Bilaspur, by its award dated February 13, 1997 directed reinstatement of respondent No, 1 with back wages on the basis of the conclusion that the termination of the respondent No. 1 amounted to an illegal retrenchment. The petitioner-Management neither reinstated nor paid any back-wages to the respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 1 submitted his re-joining report on March 6,...
Tag this Judgment!Jinda Ram Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1999
Reported in: 1999(2)MPLJ221
ORDERA.K. Mathur, C.J.1. This case has come up on account of the reference made by the learned Single Judge (Hon. S. P. Khare, J.) for decision by a larger Bench because of the conflicting decisions of the Single Bench of this Court. The question of law formulated by the learned Single Judge for answer by this Court reads as under :'Whether a revision under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code lies against the order of the appellate officer under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971?2. The Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (for short the 'Act of 1971') was enacted for eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises. The 'public premises' has been defined in Section 2(e) which reads as under :'(e) 'public premises' means :-(1) any premises belonging to, or taken on lease or requisitioned by, or on behalf of, the Central Government, and includes any such premises which have been placed by that Government, whethe...
Tag this Judgment!Hemlata Sahu and ors. Vs. Ramadhar and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ134; 1999(2)MPLJ231
A.K. Mathur, C.J.1. All the aforesaid three appeals arising out of the same accident; therefore, they are disposed of by this common order.2. On 17-6-1991 the deceased Tularam Sahu, husband of claimant-Mst. Hemlata Sahu, who was driving scooter, was going from Arang to his village Sundi. The non-claimant Ramadhar, who was on cycle, met an accident with the scooter as a result of which, the scooterist Tularam fell on the ground and received injuries. He was immediately taken to Primary Health Centre, Arang and thereafter he was shifted to D. K. Hospital, Raipur. It is alleged that during treatment, he died. Therefore, a claim petition was filed by his wife, son and daughter claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,02,000/-.3. The non-claimant Ramadhar remained ex parte. The scooter was insured with the Insurance Company and the Insurance Company contested the claim that the scooter was insured third party; therefore, the deceased, who died in the said accident, being the owner of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Motumal Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4038
ORDERR.P. Gupta, J.1. This revision-petition is directed against confirming judgment of IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Raipur dated 31-3-1993 in Cr. Appeal No. 51/90 confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the Court of C.J.M., Raipur in Cr. Case No. 389/83 vide judgment dated 3-3-1990. The petitioner has been sentenced to R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of fine R.I. for 3 months.2. The petitioner was found guilty of offence of selling adulterated peppermint to food inspector PW 1 S.B. Mishra on 8-9-1982. The purchased peppermint was divided in 3 parts and one was sent to the public analyst. The public analyst found sulphated ash 2% and ash insoluble in dil. HCL 0.5% and reported that the sample did not confirm to the standard but no standard was mentioned in the report.3. The trial court found that this accused had sold the sample and sampling was in accordance with law. The report of the public analyst proved beyond doubt that the sample did not confirm to t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »